So, who's really hurting the troops?

If it's "liberals" who want to put U.S. soldiers at greater risk, why is the White House the one underfunding medical care for veterans?

By Tim Grieve
Published June 24, 2005 4:55PM (EDT)

News item from the Washington Post: "The Bush administration, already accused by veterans groups of seeking inadequate funds for health care next year, acknowledged yesterday that it is short $1 billion for covering current needs at the Department of Veterans Affairs this year."

So Karl, put that together with the reports about the administration's lack of planning for what used to be called "post-war" Iraq and its failure to provide adequate armor for the soldiers serving there, and then please tell us again how the true "motive" of "liberals" like Dick Durbin is to endanger the lives of U.S. troops.

Oh, and Karl? While you're thinking about that, ponder this: As John Aravosis at AMERICAblog notes today, a new poll out this week identifies the man more Americans hold responsible for starting the war in Iraq. It's somebody you know pretty well, and his name isn't Saddam Hussein.

Tim Grieve

Tim Grieve is a senior writer and the author of Salon's War Room blog.

MORE FROM Tim Grieve

Related Topics ------------------------------------------

Iraq Karl Rove Middle East Richard J. Durbin D-ill.